Training Versus Development

How many times in your life have you heard someone say that a particular person is a “born” leader? Like most people, probably quite a few times over the years. The question now is… do you and your organization actually believe this to be true?

 

Even a number of renowned experts on the topic of leadership indicate that they buy-in to this concept. Yet contrary to this often held belief, there is no empirical research or data to support such a belief or take such a position. 

While there is no credible evidence to support the idea that leaders are born, there is ample evidence to also support the fact that leaders in like fashion cannot be “trained”. The American Society of Training and Development states that U.S. based businesses spend in excess of 170 billion dollars annually on leadership based curriculums, yet the vast majority of these immense expenditures are spent on leadership “training”.  

Although every human being has a capacity for leadership, such individual potential must be “developed”, which is an entirely different protocol from training.

The problem that exists is that training is grounded in the acquisition of new technical skills, systems and techniques for executing tasks. Moreover, the traditional methodology for training is one dimensional and equates to a one size fits all approach. Whatever the lead sensory system of the trainer happens to be, it will become the singular delivery modality that will be afforded to the trainees in mass. Unfortunately, everyone doesn’t learn the same way, process information in the same way or assimilate the learning opportunity that is being provided in the exact same way.

As well, the vast majority of training is provided in a monologue environment which is typically manifested in the form of lectures and power point presentations. Simply stated, traditional training modalities are delivered in a sterile environment which historically focuses on past experiences and result outcomes… Rather than business pipelines, current trends and future needs.

The idea of training is fundamentally an attempt to standardize people and processes by blending to a “norm”. Consequently, these endeavors are all too often referred to as “best practices”, which are typically the safe play when it comes to normalizing people and processes.

 

In stark contrast, the act of developing leaders focuses on the progressive development of core leadership competencies, knowledge retention and the ability to implement the learning on demand. Developmental leadership is ultimately transformational.

Leaders and leadership candidates readily indicate that they dread training and will seek to avoid it at every turn. However, they embrace the idea of developing their leadership abilities because true development programs are fluid, collaborative, hands-on and actionable. Following below are 10 of the prominent key differences between training and development:

Training conforms to standards > Development focuses on maximizing potential.

Training focuses on the present > Development focuses on the future.

Training indoctrinates > Development educates.

Training tests patience > Development tests courage.

Training focuses on technique and content > Development focuses on people.

Training maintains the status quo > Development serves as a catalyst for innovation.

Training emphasizes compliance > Development enhances performance.

Training focuses on efficiency > Development focuses on effectiveness..

Training is transactional > Development is transformational.

Training blends to a norm > Development transcends above and beyond the norm.

If your organization seeks to distinguish itself, grow forward and evolve as a viable business entity, then your leadership must develop the appropriate competencies to facilitate these outcomes.

As your valued resource partner, we provide formal development programs that will assist your organization, its leadership and your people to… Learn more… Do more… Become more.

Copyright © 2015 Developing Forward | Thomas H. Swank, CBC

People: Manage or Lead?

Years ago when our children were young, during our visit to the Epcot Center we encountered a futuristic transportation exhibit which was titled “People-Movers”. The concept pertained to how to manage the movement of large masses of people between destinations in the future.

 

In more recent times, I have encountered a somewhat similar business term referred to as “People Managers”. In a number of instances, I’ve seen this term translated as being interchangeable with Human Resource Management.

 

One of the resources I encountered on this subject stated that there were 7 specific categories of function associated with people management. More specifically, they were identified as:

 

Employee Motivation

Manage Yourself
Giving Feedback
Managing in Wartime
Organizing People  
Team Building
Recruiting and Hiring

Of the seven people management categories cited above, only recruiting and hiring are truly HR functions.

Over the course of the past decade or so, and with the aid of ever advancing technology, more and more organizations have succumbed to the practice of micromanaging every aspect of their organization including their greatest asset… their “people”.

 

All the while, companies are employing more and more robotic technology into their operations, which is at the same time serving to dehumanize/devalue their people through either job elimination,  micromanagement or people managing.

 

This should be the red flag that raises the salient question… Should people be managed or led?

 

I for one believe that people should be “led”. There are a number of reasons that I choose to take this position:

 

Employee performance is first and foremost rooted in personal “attitudes” which will ultimately result in your organization’s success or failure. It’s certainly not difficult to grasp the concept that you will attract better results with honey (leadership), than vinegar (micromanaging people).

 

Every individual has their own unique set of values & beliefs, thought patterns and personal attributes. Given the facts of human nature, none of these factors can in fact be managed by another human being. Moreover, you will be going against the grain of both the individual and organizational productivity if you try to. It would be equivalent to trying to have every employee have the same pattern of heartbeats and heart rate.

 

The single greatest issue with employee turnover and diversity in the workplace is the strong sense of not being “valued”. The truth of the matter is that people don’t want to be managed. What they truly and dearly want is to be valued and accepted as a viable member of a team.

 

How many times does industry, business and government have to practice top-down enforcement practices of rules, policies and procedures before they finally realize that it simply doesn’t get people to do great work or produce great results. To the contrary, managing people literally cripples the organization, stifles imaginations and kills creativity, for which the eventual outcome is a failure to innovate.

 

In observing and working with highly successful organizations throughout my career, I have observed many types of managers such as sales managers, production managers and office managers to name a few. As “managers”, their direct responsibility was to manage the work flow of their respective department, manage the assignment of work tasks and facilitate the directives of the organization’s executive team. Their job as a manager was entirely about managing the “processes” that made the organization’s wheels turn and which in turn generated the desired results as dictated by the organization’s vision and mission.

 

Regardless of the future destination that you are driving your organization toward, the principle for organizational success has not in spite of technological advancement changed.

 

Sharpen your focus on managing your processes, developing your talent base (people) and create future leaders that will take your organization where it wants to go.

 

As your valued resource partner, we stand ready to assist your organization, its leadership and your people to… Learn more… Do more… Become more.

 

Copyright © 2015 Developing Forward | Thomas H. Swank, CBC

Being In Control

 

Take a moment to harken back over your career for a moment. How well do you remember your very first leadership position? Do you recall how unprepared you felt as you struggled to positively influence and inspire the people that you were responsible to lead?

 

If most leaders were to be truly honest about it, they would have to admit that when they were leadership greenhorns, they believed that leadership was about being in “control”.

 

Unfortunately, the vast majority of virgin leaders and veteran leaders still hold fast to this flawed belief of being/feeling in control. While it is sad, it is also never the less true. According to one Harvard Business Review article on the subject, little has changed over the past 30 years. Leaders being in control is far more a perpetuated myth by supposed leadership, than actual fact. Studies reveal that leadership’s control over performance outcomes amounts to a paltry 10%.

 

For leaders to actually influence people to the point of having a meaningful degree of control over their people and work outcomes, they would first have to have actual “followers”. And like their predecessors of the last century, 21^st century leaders (with rare exception) still don’t have them. All too many leaders remained immersed in the theatre of trying to appear as if they are in control, which is a far cry from actually being in control.

 

When it comes to employees, they simply aren’t buying the theatre routine of their leadership and haven’t been for decades. It isn’t very difficult to connect the dots and see the correlation with the lack of employee engagement in present time. Workers at all levels have witnessed the absence of leadership buy-in, experienced every new flavor of the month program and felt the lack of value as individuals.

 

In considering the Great Recession and the years of its lingering aftermath, how may organizational situations literally got out of control? How many brick walls did organizations encounter that may have even threatened their very survival?

 

When a member of senior leadership steps forward during such difficult times and attempts to deliver a seemingly positive stem winding pep talk to reassure their people – how did their people actually view this all too predictable action?

 

While a handful of employees may have slept better that night, the majority of employees felt that it was either a theatrical act to whitewash what was really occurring or an outright act of deception to keep them in the dark.

 

Given that leadership’s meager ten percent control over performance outcomes is generally unable to contain or effectively correct the situations that placed it in jeopardy in the first place, the tendency is to dismiss the situation by making it attributable to the business environment, economic climate and the like.

 

This is where, when and how leadership typically fails to own up to and account for the fact that decisions were in fact made by the organization’s leadership which placed the organization into jeopardy in the first place and then secondarily failed to get the organization out of the jeopardous circumstance it created.

 

At a base level, there are two components which invariably translate into the myriad of leadership issues that organizations from business, industry and government are faced with.

 

       People in leadership roles that have never actually had any formal leadership training.

 

       People in leadership roles who aren’t sure what to do.

 

In working with a wide array of organization types and business classifications over the years, the same “true confession” story continues to surface again and again. It always goes pretty much like this…

“The more I progressed in my leadership training and development, the more I came to realize that I was a part of the problem and not just a part of the solution. This realization helped me to grasp the fact that my leadership style had been about being in control or thinking I was. Not only was I attempting to perform my own job, I was trying to perform everyone else’s work too. And if I was too busy to do their work, then I bossed them about how to do theirs in order to get it done right. When the problems inevitably arose, I blamed my people for the mistakes. Little by little over time, I retreated to my office, closed the door and endlessly wondered what to do.

 

I had become the ogre in the room who believed he was leading by control and command. As I have since learned, the people that I was responsible to serve as a leader simply showed up at the workplace every day and then left promptly on time. I gave them no reason to do any different. The fact was that I was treating them like worker drones instead of allowing them to utilize their talents, stretch their capabilities and feel safe to make an honest mistake from which we could all learn and grow.” 

 

The reality of this confession story is that it is exists in every organization.

 

As your valued resource partner, we can readily assist your organization, its leadership and your people in changing this story to one where they… Learn more. Do more. Become more.

 

Copyright © 2015 Developing Forward | Thomas H. Swank, CBC

Women In Business

In 1995, none of the Fortune 500 companies had a single women CEO among them. As a classic commercial once penned, “you’ve come a long way baby.”

 

Fast forward to January 2015… And there are now 25 women CEO’s who are at the leadership helm of Fortune 500 companies. In fact, according to the latest research by the women’s leadership group “The Club”, as of January 2015 women account for 51.4% of management and professional occupations.

 

Since the dawn of the twenty first century, women have been at the forefront of entrepreneurial business launches. This clearly accounts for the fact that there are currently 10.6 million business enterprises that have 50% (or higher) ownership by women.

 

A study conducted by Jack Zenger and Joseph Folkman (http:// blogs.forbes.com/jackzenger) in 2011 found that women were seen as better leaders “…at every level, more women were rated by their peers, their bosses, their direct reports, and their other associates as better overall leaders than their male counterparts – and the higher the level, the wider the gap grows.”

 

Additionally, there are other studies that find that companies with a higher representation of women in their management ranks have higher employee productivity and are more “profitable”.

 

From the stand point of personal experience, I have observed that there appears to be a far greater interest on the part of women in acquiring formal leadership development training. Moreover, women tend to immerse themselves in the leadership training more earnestly, while coming to the workshops more prepared.

 

When I observe women in business today, there is a great deal of focus on women empowering other women, especially in the form of mentoring, business groups and networking. Women seem more willing to openly share the keys for their success. I find this willingness to be a remarkable leadership trait that is enabling women leaders to pull other women up by their bootstraps and equip them to join the leadership ranks as well.

 

As a woman colleague stated to me several years ago, in order for her to achieve the level of success that she desired, she had to juggle three full time jobs… her career, her family and her home.

 

There is an old adage which says that “necessity is the mother of invention”. Just perhaps, it was my colleagues three full time responsibilities that served to sharpen her time management, setting priorities, communication, problem solving and decision making skills among others.

 

The other key attribute that I have also observed in women leaders is their ability to strike a more appropriate degree of “work-life” balance.

 

At a both a personal and professional level, I have a great deal of respect and empathy for women is business. Given my profession, this would be most understandable. However, it comes from a deeper awareness in that I have a permanently disabled wife and adult son which has caused me as well to juggle those same three full time responsibilities of career, family and home.

 

All of the available research continues to confirm that we now live in a time where women are fast becoming the most talented and respected leaders in their organizations. They garner more respect and cooperation, build better teams and are more adept in assessing the talent and resources that are required to achieve their organization’s goals.

 

As your valued resource partner, we stand ready to assist your organization, its leadership and your people to… Learn more… Do more… Become more.

Copyright © 2015 Developing Forward | Thomas H. Swank, CBC